Cites - Case Law Prohibitions on Banking

[suijuris]

12 USC, Section 24, Paragraph "Seventh."



I am aware that the United States Code Title 12, Section 24, Paragraph 7 confers upon a bank, the power to lend its money, not its credit. In First National Bank of Tallapoosa v Monroe, 135 Geo. 614; 69 S.E. 1123 (1911), the court, after citing the statute heretofore quoted, said:



"[T]he provisions referred to, do not give power to a national bank to guarantee the payment of the obligations of others solely for their benefit, nor is such power incidental of the business of banking. A bank can lend its money, but not its credit."



In Howard & Foster Co. v Citizens National Bank of Union, 133 S.C. 202; 130 SE 758, (1927) it was said:



"It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under federal law, being limited in its power and capacity, cannot lend its credit by guaranteeing the debt of another. All such contracts being entered into by its officers are ultra vires and not binding upon the parties nor the corporation. See also Merchants Bank of Valdosta v Baird, 160 F 642; 17 Lns 526 (1876).



"A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the note." See Anheuser Busch Brewing Co. v Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 NW 558 (1890).



In short, if there is no full disclosure and no consideration, there is no contract.



See the related 12 USC Section 24, sub-paragraph the "Seventh."

I have seen it posted here somewhere that it is illegal for a bank to loan its assets.



I don't know the case law for it, but if they can't loan their assets, and they can't loan their credit, then they have some "splainin" to do.



HB

[Ice]

Here's a question ( okay, a few questions) for you: Why would the U.S. make laws that basically "outlaw" everything the banks actually do? ... and then allow them to continue breaking those laws? And what penalties would those banks be subject to for breaking those laws (like fraudulent contracts, etc.)? AND how could the answer to the above questions PROTECT the U.S. from FORECLOSURE by its CREDITORS (like the Fed Reserve, frnstnce)?



Think on it... the answers you find might surprise you.

[paying-my-dues]

I have read those cases, and many more like them, but has anyone shepardized those cases to see if they still stand?

[suijuris]

If I were to use them in a case I would most certianly sheperdize.



However, if I were wanting to fight of forclosure, I would not go at it from this angle. Rather:



1. Fraud in the factum for nondisclosure that I was funding the loan

2. Demand the original note, see cites supporting this elsewhere int the forums



Also, have you brought your land patent up to date?



Chapter 11 may be a viable option if your current court proceedings fail, as the bank will have to prove their claim in chapter 11 proceedings. Do you think they will be able to produce the original note?



If you want more input from the other members, please give more details....

Thanks for the cites. I'm actually new to this site but am glad to see others doing what I'm doing, which is fighing my mortgage company in federal court (I started this) while at the same time fighting foreclosure in state court (they started).

Most urgently, I'm fighting foreclosure. The judge will decided on offering a summary judgment next week. But I've got the main gist of what you're talking about in both cases; that my note was an ultra vires contract because they don't have authority to loan credit, that they didn't disclose that to me, that they can't provide the original note, that they didn't give consideration, that they didn't use "lawful money" but "credit money" in their ledger, that they never signed the note, etc.

I'm pretty positive they won't produce the note. I was even informed in the mail several months back that it had been sold to someone else.

But I went bonkers yesterday freaking out with doubt about all of this stuff. Wondering if it was a scam approach that I had convinced myself had merit. So my question regarding your cites:

Do you know of people who have succeeded with this? Real people. Real cases.

That's my biggest thing right now. I need to find people who've been through it who can give me a word of encouragement, that I'm doing the right thing, that I'm right, that I have a chance.

In my federal case I'm submitting documents tomorrow contesting a disputure resolution agreement which requires I arbitrate before the AAA. I want to arbitrate in the ADR program of the court.

All help and replies appreciated.

Hey how do I make my response left-justify?

[Bird]

scott:

<font size=1>"But I went bonkers yesterday...Wondering if it was a scam approach that I had convinced myself had merit. So my question regarding your cites:

Do you know of people who have succeeded with this? Real people. Real cases."[/color]



When attempting to succeed at anything, personal conviction is of paramount importance. Of course, no one can give you that. Then there is knowledge, and your understanding. Yes, there is a "scam" going on, but the very first step of taking actions based on it would be to understand which party is perpetuating it [the banks, or the people who discover the truth].



Here is another case that was won against the bank on a mortage.

http://www.worldnewsstand.net/money/...oney-case.html



I don't quite understand how you thought what you are doing was a great idea until just yesterday. This ordeal must have been going on for many months now in order to have a court date next week, correct?



Also, to better enable people to contribute ideas, you may want to describe the steps that you have taken thus far to bring people up to speed with your issue. (i.e., what actions you have taken thus far).

Scott, Sir:



Contact the Dorean Group at the following email and have them help you with your situation.



doreanagent1@msn.com



This mortgage can be eliminated by using their bond process that is backed by an 85 year old Swiss bank that will take all of the stress off you.

[suijuris]

"I'm pretty positive they won't produce the note. I was even informed in the mail several months back that it had been sold to someone else."



Ok people, you need to pay close attention to the following. This is going to be some of the best information I can provide in a while relating to bank loans.



I have never heard of a case where banks have produced the original note. There are several reasons for this... one is that they modified the note after your signature. And in some cases, they cannot locate it for various reasons.



In your case, you say they allege it has been sold. If they do not produce the original, how do you know you are paying the holder of the note? How do you know that the actual holder will not come forward later and demand payment? Without the note, they have no proof of a contract. They do not have anything, unless you allow them to enter a copy of the note as evidence. There are cites in this forum (here) that show the original note is required. Without being able to enter that into evidence, they have nothing, unless they get you to testify that the note/contract exists....



Many people get tripped up one one simple thing - they admit to signing the note. Now, they can bypass all your allegations of fraud, and that the note is nonexistent or being held by another party because you have CONFESSED AND ADMITTED to signing the note... this is admitting that they loaned you money and you agreed to repay. Game over. It matters not if they can cannot provide their ledger and bookkeeping entries, the contract, the original note, proof of consideration, etc.



By admitting that your signature is on the note, you are not only admitting that you picked up a pen and wrote your name. You are attesting to the validity of the note. The altering of a document such as a note makes it a FORGERY, and no longer attests to the validity of the forged note. The forged note may have your handwriting or name at the bottom, but your signature is not lending validity to the authenticity of the document because it was altered.



A document can be a forgery not only if the signature is forged, but also if the document is altered. So when the bank stamped the note to deposit it as money to fund the check, the note was fundamentally altered, and became a forgery.



If I were asked if it is my signature that appears on the note, my response would be that "...it looks like a great forgery. As I do not understand what this document is, can you stipulate if this promissory note acts like money or the equivalent to money use to give value to a bank check? Can you stipulate all of the material facts about the promissory note or what the agreement is so I know what it is that my alleged signature is validating as to the agreement? I can not determine if it is myself or the bank who provides the capitol to fund the check. I cannot testify if something is my signature if I do not know what is agreed to in the alleged document. I cannot answer until these questions are explained to me."



Remember, your signature means that you agree the bank lent you their money and that you owe them yours. Without you testifying that it is your signature or the bank producing the original, unaltered note, does the bank have any evidence of a contract or that the note ever existed? Without producing their ledgers, do they have any evidence of a loan? Without any evidence, do they HAVE A CASE?



Just my thoughts based on my research... I recommend the Rommel school of law's banking handbook as well as the bankhonesty.com material, I have learned much from both. If you can afford them, get them BEFORE going to court.



Scott, I hope you will provide more details on your case. What was the cause of action, what relief was sought, what evidence has been provided by yourself and the plaintiff, what motions, memorandums, etc, have been filed?



And most importantly, why is the bank requesting summary judgment? Are there really no facts in controversy? Can you prove otherwise?

[logos]

I'm in foreclosure myself and read the following reassuring statement in the court calender sent to me by the court clerk:



"The following originals should be submitted at the hearing on Motion for Judgment of Strict Foreclosure or Motion for Judgment of Foreclosure by Sale: Mortgage Note and Deed (or Affidavit of Loss), Appraisal Report, Affidavit of Debt with updated computation of the debt to the day of judgment, and any necessary military affidavits."



Folks out there should check their respective courts to see if they say something similiar.